Role of the Executive branch in administration
⚖️ Role of the Executive Branch in Administration
📌 Overview
The Executive branch of government is primarily responsible for the implementation and administration of laws and policies. In the Australian system (and other common law jurisdictions), the Executive:
Executes laws passed by the legislature.
Manages government departments and agencies.
Makes administrative decisions affecting individuals and the public.
Exercises discretion in applying the law.
Ensures the delivery of public services.
Develops regulations and guidelines within the scope of legislation.
🔹 Key Functions of the Executive in Administration
Decision-Making: Making administrative decisions that impact rights, obligations, and entitlements.
Policy Implementation: Translating legislative policy into practice.
Delegated Authority: Exercising powers delegated by legislation.
Regulation and Enforcement: Creating regulations under statutory authority and enforcing them.
Accountability: Subject to judicial review and parliamentary oversight to prevent abuse of power.
⚖️ Key Case Law on the Executive’s Role in Administration
1. Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Ltd (1986) 162 CLR 24
Facts:
The Minister declined to approve a mining lease. The applicant challenged the decision, arguing that the Minister failed to consider all relevant factors.
Principle:
The Executive must exercise its discretion properly and according to law.
Administrative decisions must be made in good faith, considering all relevant matters and ignoring irrelevant ones.
Impact:
This case highlights the boundaries of Executive discretion in administration, requiring lawful and reasoned decision-making.
Citation:
Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Ltd (1986) 162 CLR 24
2. Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth (2003) 211 CLR 476
Facts:
The Commonwealth attempted to limit judicial review of administrative decisions by passing a privative clause.
Principle:
The Executive’s administrative actions are subject to judicial review.
Parliament cannot legislate to prevent courts from reviewing jurisdictional errors by the Executive.
Impact:
This case underscores that while the Executive has broad administrative powers, those powers are checked by the judiciary to ensure legality.
Citation:
Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth (2003) 211 CLR 476
3. Annetts v McCann (1990) 170 CLR 596
Facts:
The Executive agency conducted an inquiry into a death, making findings which affected reputations.
Principle:
The Executive must observe procedural fairness (natural justice) in administrative decision-making.
This duty applies even in inquiries or investigations.
Impact:
The Executive’s administrative decisions are subject to principles of fairness and due process.
Citation:
Annetts v McCann (1990) 170 CLR 596
4. Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li (2013) 249 CLR 332
Facts:
The Immigration Minister refused a visa based on adverse information. The applicant claimed the decision was unreasonable.
Principle:
The Executive must make decisions that are reasonable and supported by evidence.
Courts will intervene where decisions are irrational or lack an evidential basis.
Impact:
This case emphasizes the limits of Executive discretion, ensuring decisions are rational and legally sound.
Citation:
Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li (2013) 249 CLR 332
5. R v Secretary of State for the Home Department; Ex parte Doody (1994) 1 AC 531 (UK Case but influential)
Facts:
The Secretary of State made decisions affecting prisoners without providing reasons.
Principle:
The Executive must provide reasons for decisions where they affect rights or legitimate expectations.
Promotes transparency and accountability in administration.
Impact:
Though UK law, this principle is widely adopted in Australia, reinforcing the role of the Executive to be accountable in decision-making.
🔹 Summary Table of Cases
| Case Name | Year | Principle Focus |
|---|---|---|
| Minister for Aboriginal Affairs v Peko-Wallsend Ltd | 1986 | Proper exercise of discretion |
| Plaintiff S157/2002 v Commonwealth | 2003 | Judicial review of Executive decisions |
| Annetts v McCann | 1990 | Procedural fairness in administrative actions |
| Minister for Immigration and Citizenship v Li | 2013 | Reasonableness and rationality of decisions |
| R v Secretary of State; Ex parte Doody | 1994 | Transparency and accountability (UK case) |
✅ Conclusion
The Executive branch plays a vital role in the administration and enforcement of laws. However, its powers are not absolute. Judicial review and principles such as procedural fairness, reasonableness, and accountability limit executive discretion to ensure government actions are lawful, fair, and transparent.
This balance maintains the rule of law and protects individuals from administrative overreach.
RELATED Blog
0 comments